memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:OuroborosCobra
For older discussions, see my 2006 archive and my 2007 archive. Jaz talk 00:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC) User page editing I am sorry that I edited a person's main page. I wasn't sure how to communicate with them. I will make sure from now on to use their talk pages as I am here. (User:Preator) Nomination for administratorship Hi, I think it is only fair to tell you that I have just nominated you for administrationship on MA/en. I personally hope it will succeed, and I hope you do that to :-P. (if you don't remember the way to nomination-page: MA:NFA). Have faith in the Prophets. -- Rom Ulan 21:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC) :Thank for for the nomination, though I doubt I will pass this round. Still, this will give me an opportunity to hear how people want me to improve in the future. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Happy New Year. We have locked horns on a number of occasions, and will probably do so again, but I do respect your work here. Happy New Year, sir.– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 23:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC) :Thank you for the kind words, and Happy New Year yourself :-) --OuroborosCobra talk 01:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC) Thank you for answering my question. I should have known that. Take care. My'chol House of K'Tylo Talk Pages I understand why you did that, but it was kind of a legit prode on whether such a thing could be made into a background note. I'm also curious if such a plot concept has appeared in novels or comic books. I also dont think anything should be removed from a talk page except pure vandalism, even if it is just fans talking about stuff. The exception I can think of would be fans carrying on a lenghty conversation on a talk page about something that has nothing to do with the article. I did reword the comment to focus on my asking a question. If you still feel it must be removed, then I suggest an article talk page note saying that its been moved to my personal talk page and make the move as such. Cool? Thanks. -FleetCaptain 20:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :You started it off by saying "I know this will never make it into the article, but...", that makes it not a prode about a background note. I can tell you that the answer to putting it in the article would be a "no". It is way too speculative, off base, and not the least bit what happened. Our talk page policy makes clear what talk pages are for, content relating to the article and changes to be discussed, and as you worded it yours was not. We have been removing off topic conversations for awhile now, intentional vandalism or not. Your topic essentially fell into the latter, "lengthy conversation which has nothing to do with the article". It did not start as having to do with the article, and responses weren't going to have to do with the article. I hope that explains why I just outright removed it. I haven't had a chance to look at your changes (and probably won't for awhile, I have work to get done), but if you changed it to talk about possible notes or changes to the article, it can stay on the talk page (even if the answer is a "no", since it will be a legitimate question). --OuroborosCobra talk 21:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC) I trimmed it way back to just a simple background note in Star Trek IV which had nothing to do with the paradox question. Although I am still curious if such a thing has ever appeared in a novel or comic book. As stated on the article talk page, maybe I'll try and write such a novel one day (if I ever get published the non-Trek novel I'm working on right now!) Thanks for you inputs. -FleetCaptain 21:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 'Overreacting' You told me to calm down and take a chill pill on Shran's page when I yelled for help in removing a copyrighted image. You don't understand. It wasn't MA I was worried about. It was the wife of the friend who I got the image from. This is what happened. Bill Cobbs was here in Tobago filming a movie. My close friend and his wife are working on the set. So, Cobbs granted them some nice photos of him with them, which they took with their own cameras. I immediately thought of MA and asked my friend for one, telling him what I intended to use it for: to put it here on MA in the Cobbs article. After all, he took the picture, he is the copyright owner, right? He said ok. "What luck!", says I. Your own friend hooking you up with a Trek Actor image that he took and giving you full rights to use it! Except that, as it turns out, his wife signed a contract stating, among other things, that no images, personal or otherwise, were to be used online. My friend knew this. But he was so tired from the work that he apparently did not hear what I said about using the image online when I told him what I intended to do. So, I put it on, in the Cobbs article, giving him full credit as the owner, and email him the link so he could see it. Five minutes later, his wife calls me, demanding in no uncertain terms that I "Take it off ''now!" She explains why, and makes it clear what trouble I'd be in if I did not. What trouble? If anybody from the film company saw it, the company would come after them. And who'd she put them onto as the culprit? ME! Lawsuit! Fines! ME! And they'd have no trouble finding me. They'd get my address and name from her! Would they have understood the copyright violation was unintentional? I wasn't about to let it stay there long enough to find out. I've never even ''seen the inside of a courtroom in my life. Understand now why I was so frightened? You tell me if you wouldn't get scared in that situation. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 22:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC) :Actually, in that scenario, only the people who signed the contract would be in trouble. They could have given them your address and name, but they couldn't have done anything with it, legally. The responsibility falls on her to ensure that image never gets on the internet. If it happens, the fault is her's, no one else's. No one can be in a breach of contract with the exception of the person who signed the contract. She was just scared of getting her own butt sued, is all. --From Andoria with Love 22:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Well, thankfully, nobody is suing anybody. And I was commended by Tim for moving so quickly on this copyvio. Friendship remains intact. Actually, she is my friend too. Just not as close as him. Shame, though. It was a nice pic.:)– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 23:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC) 'Personal Attacks' Your accusation was uncalled for. That's all I'm going to say here.– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 21:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC) :You made a personal statement about Alan. There was no reason to do so. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC) I have already apologized to Alan for my unintentional offense, not that it is any of your business. The matter is closed.– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 02:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC) :If the matter was "closed", you would not have shifted the focus to attacking me and my general practices as an editor in that discussion. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC) ::Why so serious? Let's not bicker and argue about who attacked who. This is a happy site! Let's see some smiles! Give each other a hug! Show some brotherly love! Nothing Brokeback-ish, of course. :P --From Andoria with Love 03:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC) :You made me think of Heath Ledger :-( --OuroborosCobra talk 03:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC) ::Well, I did have two Ledger movie refs in there. In his honor, of course. In fact, I just rented The Brothers Grimm. Been wanting to see it, anyway; now seemed to be an ideal time. :/ --From Andoria with Love 03:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)